United States v. Ram Kumar Singh

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying Dunnigan in a case where the court found' that the defendant perjured himself during his sentencing hearing
• addressing the previous version of the rule under § 2F1.1(b)(6) containing the same relevant language as the present provision under § 2B1.1(b)(10)(B)
• affirming application of § 2Bl.l(b)(10)(B) where defendant did not travel outside United States, but “evidence clearly established that some of the conspiracy’s acts occurred outside of the United States”
• ex- plaining that the district court is “accord[ed] great deference” on obstruction-of-justice enhancement determinations (internal quo- tation marks omitted)
• reviewing application of § 2B1.1(b)(10)(B) for clear error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).